I found this. Which isn't like what the school in Baldwin County is, and is affiliated with Hinds CC rather than Madison County schools. Also, if there were a new public-private school going into Madison County I'm sure we would have heard about it from other sources by now.
Or maybe said official wasn't at liberty to tell everything he knows.
I don't think its that big of a secret - its just something that has not made widespread news. It was all the talk on the Coast last week at the ACTE convention. That's where I heard about it.
Well of course private funding can be used however the private person/organization sees fit.
Are CTE classes not popular in Mississippi?
Probably about the same number as the last 6 times you mentioned this in public education school district threads.
They are popular.
Who is pushing back that has any power to decide the status quo should continue?
Am I?
It's because you don't bring facts. Just effeminate anger.
TLDR since you have shown to not comprehend anything longer than an original tweet...
Of course the message he is responding to isn't factual. Its a question. "And out of those 137 superintendents how many are paid a top 7% income and run failing districts?"
If it's like the River City Early College in Vicksburg (Part of Vicksburg-Warren School District), then the students can still participate in the extra-curriculars of the "normal" high school they are zoned to.
I can't find anything, either. And I am a Madison County resident with a child in the MCSD and I work in an industry that has been involved first-hand with the development of the Amazon sites since the inception. I know they proposed funding some vocational education programs at either the local high schools or Holmes CC, but this is the first I've heard of a new established academy. 615 must have a better scoop than the people we work with.
You know the background of course but at one time Clinton was in the Hinds County District with Raymond, Byram, Terry, and Utica.
There are CTE schools/parts of schools much like there was vo-tech when I grew up. The same stigma, unfortunately, is attached. Some of the smartest people I know did not thrive in a traditional educational setting. I personally hated it, but I'm not one of the smartest people I know...
I'm not aware of anyone who doesn't agree. Our educational system in MS is designed to provide max $$$ for those who are in leadership while also providing high pay for retired teachers who then return to "consult" with their former employer. Luckily, we also have a strong tendency to reward good teachers by moving them out of the classroom and into roles at central office as "specialists". With MDE "oversight" and all the known corruption that, at least in the past, was/is in that place, I think that most, like me, see no path for improvement.
You didn't link shlt. And you alleged the fact, so the burden of proof is on you. Stupid 17.
You are saying "no reason", well, what is your reason that they should consolidate if they do not want to do so? Lot of evidence that smaller classrooms are more conducive to learning.
You can't really tell me that merger is going to make some huge educational difference, going from 4A or whatever they were, to now a 7A or what not. They will likely get better at sports, though, but like you said, to the detriment of some athletes.
I can find the thread where a lot of the usual suspects thought the superintendent pay was perfectly fine around the state.
I've linked about superintendent pay before. Pretty sure your DA replied.
That is a related argument to the one you are making here, but it is a different argument.
I haven't said a word about consolidation in this thread.
Yep.
I wonder if we'll ever start rethinking the entire structure of the high school education....
I think that a perception of high pay is largely subjective based on what the observer makes. I agree that 1) there are too many districts and 2) this leads to too many superintendents and 3) we are wasting money on these higher compensated positions because so many of them have so few kids under them (i.e. there's no good reason for that to be a district). I think I'd be fine with the rate of pay IF the level of responsibility reflected it. To your primary point if your school district is failing then you for sure are over paid. Public sector "accountability" is just different than private.
If we consolidated and the districts were performing well academically and managing their budgets efficiently, i'd be ok if they made $200,000 to $300,000 per year.
You commented on how you have talked about Sup pay before. In those threads, you have ranted about how there are too many Sups, and that is part of the complaint of how much Sups are paid.
you haven't heard me argue against consolidation.
